Barkley owned Malone for 10-11 Years. Clearly from 85 to 95 I have the stats

The Only Time Malone could Guard Barkley and do a Good Job was when Chuck was In Houston Overweight and Lost His Leaping Ability, Agility and Explosion at Age 33...Filled With Back and Knee Problems All Over

Barkley Owned Malone from 1985 to 1995.
Malone got the Better of Barkley from 96-2000.

well that is flat out wrong, considering he was 9th in 1991. and then there was 1988 where he was 10th, and then 11th in 1989, and then 10th in 1990, and then finally 16th in 1992.

Quote:

No chance, Pippen was great in the second half and postseason, but he wasn't there yet. As much as I like Scottie, and despite it being probably his second best playoff run and a breakout year, Pippen probably wasn't top 10 yet, and certainly not better than Barkley. Though Pippen did enter the top 10 in '92 and I'd be tempted to rank him above Charles that season.

lol pippen was easily better than barkley, and top 2 overall.
17.8ppg, 7.3rpg, 6.2apg, 2.4spg, 1.1bpg on a 61 win team in the regular season
21.6ppg, 8.9rpg, 5.8apg, 2.5spg, 1.1bpg on a team that went 15-2 in the playoffs and obviously won the championship, including 32 points, 13 rebounds, 7 assists, 5 steals, and 1 block in the championship clinching game 5 on the road.

Quote:

Correct, he was number 2 as I mentioned.

he was third behind pippen

Quote:

Nah, but he has a case due to his defensive impact. But his 55 win Spurs were upset by the 44 win Warriors as they neutralized Robinson's impact, and David failed to really put his stamp on the series and dominate a tiny Warrirs team who were terrible defensively. Definitely a team he should have dominated.

This selection isn't outrageous, though, so I don't have a problem with it, just definitely disagree.

robinson did have a disappointing playoffs (even though he did average 25.8ppg, 13.5rpg, 2.0apg, 1.5spg, 3.75bpg, on 69%fg), and he was demoted in the overall rankings due to that, but we can't totally discount his fantastic regular season. robinson was the second most valuable player in the nba, only behind michael jordan in that regard, and averaged 25.6ppg, led the league with 13.0rpg, 2.5apg, 1.5spg, and 3.9bpg, on 55%fg while leading the spurs to a 55-27 mark.

Quote:

Stockton was never better than Barkley in any season until he was a Rocket. John was a terrific pure point guard and an excellent sidekick/complementary player, but at his best, he was borderline top 10. Just didn't have the true MVP-caliber ability to dominate a game that a guy like Barkley did. '91 may have been his best year, though, so if I'm feeling generous, I may give him the 9th ranking that you have Barkley, purely due to KJ being injured and unable to perform up to his standard in the playoffs. The same way KJ outplaying Stockton in the playoffs sealed his spot over Stockton in my '90 rankings.

on top of '91, stockton was also better than barkley in 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1992. fantastic floor general and leader, stockton was everything you could possibly ask out of your point guard. he could score, but he wouldn't shoot too much, he led the league in assists 9 straight seasons, was always in the top 5 is steals, and he shot the ball at a delicious clip from the field, 3 point, and free throw.
as for 1990 rankings stockton is still ahead of kj despite kj having the better playoff run due to stockton's far superior regular season. are you going to rank kj ahead of magic johnson in 1990 aswell considering johnson beat magic's lakers 4-1

Quote:

Nah, Hakeem was typically close to Barkley from '88-'92, and passed him after, but Hakeem missed 26 games, and when he returned, he was in a reduced offensive role averaging just 18 ppg upon returning to the lineup with Kenny Smith leading them in scoring and Houston succeeding with an up tempo style, outside shooting and screen/rolls as opposed to Dream carrying them in the post. Houston went 20-7 with Dream in the reduced offensive role, and they had a winning record for once with Dream out of the lineup going 16-10. This was a down year for Hakeem. He definitely wasn't better than Barkley this season.

14 out of those 26 games were at home
of those 16 wins 3 were against the timberwolves (2 at home) who finished 29-53
2 wins were against the worst team in the nba (nuggets)
1 win was at home to the clippers (31-51)
2 wins against the cavs (33-49)

in 26 games they only ended up beating 3 teams with winning records. olajuwon then came back in and joined a team that was 9 over .500 and they finished 22 over .500.

Quote:

No as I covered before. '92 was the only year from Barkley's prime when Malone was better, and that's because Barkley was a notch below prime level that year.

destroyed

Quote:

Not a chance. Drexler had a very nice all around game, but was a guy who benefited greatly from transition opportunities and wasn't the type of dominant half court offensive player that Barkley he was. He wasn't the same type of player who would alter a team's entire defense, cause constant doubles and impose his will on a game. Besides, Clyde had the most talented team in the league, and they were upset by the Lakers. There's a visible difference between Drexler and Barkley when watching them. Out of their entire careers, Drexler was only better than Barkley in '98.

slightley better in the regular season, and easily better in the playoffs. drexler led his team to the best record in the nba, and the conference finals. drexler was just superb in the playoffs, with averages of 21.7ppg, 8.1rpg, 8.1apg, 2.1spg, and 1.0bpg

Quote:

Nah, Barkley had the better regular season too.

Quote:

Barkley's team won 44 games because they were weak, they went just 5-10 without him

well obviously barkley should have been playing, otherwise they might not have went 5-10

Quote:

Charles scored almost as much on better efficiency while not being the beneficiary of Stockton's countless assists. Malone relying on easy baskets, particularly at that stage of his career is why his efficiency plummeted as usual to 42.4% in the semifinals when Portland knocked them out and 45.5% for the entire playoffs.

Barkley was also the vastly superior passer at that time.

At least Malone was arguably a top 5 player himself, but regardless of how close their rankings were, the gap in ability was still clear in '91.

baskets are baskets, easy baskets or difficult baskets. i know i'd rather have my power forward being in the right spots for layups than shooting fade away 3s with 15 seconds left on the shot clock.

malone was aslo the vastly superior defender at that time.

Quote:

Nah, and if you did have a case for that statement, it'd be due to missed games, but 15 isn't enough. And 3rd team is way too low. Malone was the only forward besides Barkley who was even top 10 that year.

it will be due to games missed and 15 games is a bit chunk of the season. pippen was another forward in the top 10 that year, infact he was ranked 2nd. and as for forwards in the all-nba teams 1st team should've been malone and pippen. second team dominique wilkins and chris mullin. third team would be larry nance and charles barkley

Quote:

Hawkins was a nice player who could certainly score, but in no way was he a top 3 shooting guard. In addition to Jordan and Drexler, Hawkins also finds himself behind Dumars, Richmond, Reggie Lewis and possibly Reggie Miller.

firstly reggie lewis was a small forward. dumars was nice but not on the level of hawkins in this one particular season, the others are nowhere in the vicinity.

Quote:

Gilliam was a talented post scorer, but he was a bad fit in Philly. This was because his game did not fit with Barkley's. Anderson was a nice bench scorer, and Mahorn was indeed solid. But that's not much depth, and precisely why they struggled to a 5-10 record without him

or was it because barkley had the type of game that was hard to adjust to as a teammate? i know for example that kj was on pace to be one of the great all-time guards before barkley decided to force a trade to the 56 win suns team..and his career fizzled not long after.

Quote:

For me it's simple, you ask me who I'm taking between '89-'93 Barkley and '94-'98 Malone, and I'm taking Barkley without thinking twice.

its quite simple for me aswell i am taking malone 100 times out of 10.

Quote:

That is interesting that Malone was voted MVP in a season that was nowhere near his best, though part of that speaks to the lack of quality seasons in the lockout year. And while I don't care about awards given out in a 50 game season, I'd have chosen Duncan.

i also have duncan as league mvp, but it is just an interesting thought.

Barkley owned Malone for 10-11 Years. Clearly from 85 to 95 I have the stats

The Only Time Malone could Guard Barkley and do a Good Job was when Chuck was In Houston Overweight and Lost His Leaping Ability, Agility and Explosion at Age 33...Filled With Back and Knee Problems All Over

Barkley Owned Malone from 1985 to 1995.
Malone got the Better of Barkley from 96-2000.

this clown again i have already destroyed this filth

barkley - fat and bald, no defense, cried and got traded to dominant teams and still lost
malone - incredible work ethic, never missed games, defensive genius

Going by their peaks and individual skills, Barkley was better than Malone. Better at creating, more efficient scorer, more versatile, better rebounder, better passer, and better in the clutch. A common misconception is that Barkley was a terrible defender. Barkley wasn't a terrible defender at all. He was however, a very lazy defender. He took many plays off on D. He also wasn't big on conditioning, unlike Malone, who was a gym rat.

Now as far as teammates. Some like to say that Barkley had way more help. Not true. Barkley's only real help was his rookie year, where he had Moses(25/13), Dr. J(20/5), Toney(18/5), and Cheeks(13/6), and reached the ECF.

In '86, Moses didn't play at all in the playoffs. Chuck led the way, averaging 25/16/6 with Dr. J playing respectably, but clearly declining...and Mo Cheeks putting up 21/7/5 in the playoffs and they were 1 win away from the ECF.

In '87, Moses was gone, Dr. J was on his last legs, and Toney was a bench player. Cheeks was the only other real dependable player.

Then from '88 on, no Moses or Dr. J and Cheeks left in '89. His sources of help were Cliff Robinson, Mike Gminski, Hersey Hawkins, Ron Anderson, and Johnny Dawkins.

There were 3 years where the 76ers greatly overachieved solely because of Barkley's play. The 1st one was in '86 where Moses didn't play at all in the playoffs and they came within 1 win of the ECF with Barkley averaging 25/16/6 in the playoffs. The 2nd one was in '90 where Barkley led the 76ers to 53 wins and was robbed of MVP. The 3rd one was in '91 where the 76ers swept Milwaukee in the first round with Barkley averaging 24/11/7/3 on 52% shooting in the three games, including a triple-double in game 2.

Barkley at his best was the best player in the world not named Michael Jordan. As great as Malone was, he was never at that level of greatness. Malone never singlehandedly took over games and led otherwise mediocre teammates to victory like Barkley did. Malone often folded under pressure, something Barkley didn't do. Barkley may have had games where he didn't play as well as he should have, but he never flat out choked. He actually elevated his play in the playoffs. My only issue with Charles was his laziness. He took many plays off and that is something Malone didn't do. The better player was clearly Charles Barkley. The better career however, was clearly Karl Malone.

They are one in the same. Having the ability but not putting it to use is irrelevant.

They're not the same at all. Being a terrible defender would mean that even when putting in the effort, he would still suck. That would be like Steve Nash, who could put all the effort in the world into defense and he would still stuck. When Charles put in the effort, he was a very good defender. Philadelphia announcers made notice of this around '90-'91. They specifically mentioned Chuck was lazy on D, but was very good when he put in the effort. Chuck actually bitched to them when they made the comments.

Quote:

You could definitely make that argument for malone in 97 and 98.

Just because he was the best player after Jordan doesn't mean he was on Barkley's peak level.

They're not the same at all. Being a terrible defender would mean that even when putting in the effort, he would still suck. That would be like Steve Nash, who could put all the effort in the world into defense and he would still stuck. When Charles put in the effort, he was a very good defender. Philadelphia announcers made notice of this around '90-'91. They specifically mentioned Chuck was lazy on D, but was very good when he put in the effort. Chuck actually bitched to them when they made the comments.

The net effect on the court is: terrible defense. Ability is irrelevant. All that matters is the actual result on the court.

The net effect on the court is: terrible defense. Ability is irrelevant. All that matters is the actual result on the court.

Ability is not irrelevant. Not all players have the ability, Chuck did. And Chuck did provide evidence(even if only in brief stretches) that he was a good defender when he didn't take plays off. I watched games of Chuck. I watched him lock players down and provide weak side defense. I'm not blind. And I also very clearly remember him playing in the late 80s and early 90s.